The journal entitled Relationship building in Vietnamese English written

business communication: A systemic functional analysis written by Bich H N

Nguyen and Rhonda Oliver and published online in 16 July 2015 explains about
how interpersonal relationships are indirectly depicted in Vietnamese English
business written texts. To answers several questions related to the discourse which
used in the journal, the research object, problems, theoretical concepts, examples
of analysis and the result of the journal, the writer decided to write them as points
below:
1. The Discourse of Journal
In the general idea, discourse analysis is the ways in which a
language is used in texts and contexts. Through it, readers could learn and
understand true meanings provided by writers in the written texts as J.P.
Gee (2005) stated that discourse analysis is one way to engage in a very
important human task. The task is this: to think more deeply about the
meanings we give people's words so as to make ourselves better, more
humane people and the world a better, more humane place.
As for the discourse depicted in the journal Relationship building
in Vietnamese English written business communication: A systemic
functional analysis, the writer, through Bich H N Nguyen and Rhonda
Oliver perspective, finds out that aside from the function of
communicating and transferring a persons ideas to another through
written utterances, there is also a possibility of building and creating an
atmosphere to enhance personal relationships between writers and readers.
The efforts of building such relationships are shown in the form of writing
the text in a friendly way, strengthening the power of the text by using
modals, addressing the recipients as family members and etc.

By using Systemic Functional Analysis (SFL) as the tool and

framework of the study, the journal reveals how Vietnamese English is still
used based on its people culture and value, as it makes a new variation to
English itself.
2. The Research Object
The research object of the journal is to find out the possibility of
building interpersonal relationships in Vietnamese English business
written texts to literally value the readers and get closer with them as what
Bargiela-Chiappini and Harris (1996) stated about maximisation of
support (p. 645). In order to complete the journal, Bich H N Nguyen and
Rhonda Oliver had invited 9 from 10 selected Vietnamese-owned
companies to collect their English business written texts in order to be
analyzed. Although
3. The Problems
The problems of the journal could be understood through its
research questions, as listed below:

What are the features of speech functions, mood, modality and

terms of address used in Vietnamese English business texts?

What do they tell us about how interpersonal relationships are

being construed through language by Vietnamese writers?

To what extent does the nature of English used for

interpersonal purposes in Vietnamese written business
communication support arguments regarding the existence of a
Vietnamese variety of English?

4. The Theoretical Concepts

As Halliday and Matthiessen (2013) stated that SFL sees language

as a semiotic system, a meaning making process. It treats language
according to their functions and structures in society in which it is used
without having to compare it with other languages such as American
English and British English. Therefore, we, readers, should not judge
features in Vietnamese English such as the use of Vietnamese kinships in
English business written texts as something which oppose the ideal
English as international language but as a new variation to enrich its
diversity.
5. Examples of Analysis
There are some examples in the journal as the way to validate the
believe stating that building relationships through Vietnamese English
business written texts is true, such as:
SPEECH FUNCTIONS AND MOOD
1) Please have a look and give me your comment (text 8-6-O)
2) Would you confirm your mail receipt? (text 9-1-A)
From this analysis, readers could decide the strong impression
given by some statements in writing. Taking the first sentence to be
analyzed, it shows that the writer has frequently made contact with the
reader. This is also supported by the indication of politeness (i.e. the
word please) thus displaying such an equal relationship.
Meanwhile, the next sentence clearly shows that the writer and the
reader are not in equal relationship; one should be in a higher position of
another, thus creating a picture of formal and strict communication.

MODALITY

1) Our staff will contact you within today. (text 7-31-C)

2) [I] will let you know in very short times. (text 1-10-H)
These writing are quoted from the journal as they have a close
relationship with modality, in the case of using discourse stances (i.e. first
person singular). The first sentence uses the reference our which to
strongly state that this is between a group of people (i.e. company) and a
reader which is so formal and strict without any effort to get closer with
the readers. Meanwhile the second one uses the reference I as a form of
personal and subjective point of view which enables the writer and the
reader to be personally leaving behind some company values.
These are actually some examples from the journal analysis. The
rest would be more detailed in the journal itself.
6. The Result of Journal
As the result of research from the journal, it is conclude that
writers take some choices and purposes in order to communicate with their
readers through written utterances. The research related to some linguistics
forms such as speech function and mood, modality and addressing people
in Vietnamese English also has found its credential proof. In speech
function and mood, it is concluded that besides communicating ideas from
one to another, readers could also interpret the kind of relationships in
which writers and readers are engaged, showing whether they are equal or
not to each other. The modality in Vietnamese English business texts also
has shown that the use of English modals is varied, besides according to its
functions, also to its urgencies like the use of will is much more stable
and fixed rather than should which is a bit more into advising.

Through the research of the journal as well, readers could

understand that Vietnamese English is still strongly bound to its people

cultural values such as the way in which writers see their readers as family
members (i.e. anh older brother, chi older sister, co auntie) the use of
Vietnamese lexis in English such as chuc mung which stands as
congratulations, va as and, chao hello, and vocative particle oi which
means hey.
Furthermore, this study has consolidated a functional view of
language as a theory of choice (Webster 2009: 1) to account for how
interpersonal relationships were built and sustained in Vietnamese written
business communication. The journal boldly support Mahboob and
Szenes (2010) contention that language should be considered as a
meaning making resource and not just as a marker that identifies the
country/region that the user of this language belongs to (p. 597). As the
data show that we could not associate common-known English features in
Vietnamese English, as it deals with national identities.

References

1) Bich H N Nguyen and Rhonda Oliver, Relationship building in

Vietnamese English written business communication: A systemic
functional analysis. 2015. Curtin University, Australia.
2) Bargiela-Chiappini, Francesca, and SJ Harris. 1996. Requests and
status in business correspondence. Journal of Pragmatics
3) Halliday, Michael AK, and Christian Matthiessen. 2013. Hallidays
introduction to functional grammar, 4th ed. London: Routledge.
4) Webster, Jonathan J. 2009. An introduction to Continuum
companion to Systemic Functional Linguistics. In Continuum
companion to Systemic Functional Linguistics, ed. Michael
Alexander Kirkwood Halliday and Jonathan Webster,112.
London: Continuum.
5) Mahboob, Ahmar, and Eszter Szenes. 2010. Construing meaning in
World Englishes. In The Routledge handbook of World Englishes,
ed. Andy Kirkpatrick, 580598. New York, NY: Routledge.

JOURNAL